DOCSLIB.ORG

Enharmonic Substitution in Bernard Herrmann's Early Works

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Enharmonic Substitution in Bernard Herrmann's Early Works Enharmonic Substitution in Bernard Herrmann’s Early Works By William Wrobel In the course of my research of Bernard Herrmann scores over the years, I’ve recently come across what I assume to be an interesting notational inconsistency in Herrmann’s scores. Several months ago I began to earnestly focus on his scores prior to 1947, especially while doing research of his Citizen Kane score (1941) for my Film Score Rundowns website (http://www.filmmusic.cjb.net). Also I visited UCSB to study his Symphony (1941) and earlier scores. What I noticed is that roughly prior to 1947 Herrmann tended to consistently write enharmonic notes for certain diatonic chords, especially E substituted for Fb (F-flat) in, say, Fb major 7th (Fb/Ab/Cb/Eb) chords, and (less frequently) B substituted for Cb in, say, Ab minor (Ab/Cb/Eb) triads. Occasionally I would see instances of other note exchanges such as Gb for F# in a D maj 7 chord. This enharmonic substitution (or “equivalence” if you prefer that term) is overwhelmingly consistent in Herrmann’ notational practice in scores roughly prior to 1947, and curiously abandoned by the composer afterwards. The notational “inconsistency,” therefore, relates to the change of practice split between these two periods of Herrmann’s career, almost a form of “Before” and “After” portrayal of his notational habits. Indeed, after examination of several dozens of his scores in the “After” period, I have seen (so far in this ongoing research) only one instance of enharmonic substitution similar to what Herrmann engaged in before 1947 (see my discussion in point # 19 on Battle of Neretva). Some people might be skeptical that Herrmann (or any composer) would change his notation habits several years after the start of a professional composing career. They may counter that it can be “explained” away by any of many “variables” such as economy of notation (less accidentals such as sharp and flat symbols placed before notes), freedom to notate without a key signature, consideration of transposing versus non-transposing instruments, consideration for the ease of what the performer reads, and special conditions regarding voice leading, and so forth. The intent of this paper is to show this “Before” and “After” phenomenon based on a study of Herrmann’s scores spanning a forty-year period. I will cite many precise scores/cues/bars that will hopefully serve as a preliminary base upon which to show my point. I am not necessarily attempting to “prove” a point since I may need a sample of thousands of examples in order to statistically demonstrate a clear change of Herrmann’s notation habits in this regard. However, I hope to narrow down the complexity by focusing on the unusual Fb note in Herrmann’s scores. The F-flat note would be among the least common found of the seven diatonic flat notes in most works by composers. For instance, one normally does not find many Fb major or minor chords in a composition as compared to, say, the Gb or Bb chords, and even Cb chords. Now: Certain root assumptions are presumed that I will now explain. First of all, we are focusing on a composer (Herrmann) who was definitely not a twelve-tone or atonal composer. Twelve-tone music tends to have no or little tonal consideration in 1 diatonic terms, and enharmonic exchange is not unusual in such works. It is assumed that there will be enharmonic substitution of all or most pitch-classes. Secondly, we need to establish ourselves, therefore, with so-called “Western” music based on the diatonic scale of eight notes (consisting of whole steps and half steps arranged in alphabetical order). As a result, a “correctly” [logically] constructed chord written on paper (in terms of basic music theory) is based on intervals of thirds, most easily memorized in “proper” letter/note sequence as F-A-C-E-G-B-D (or if one prefers, C-E-G-B-D-F-A). Exceptions would include the construction of suspended chords in which the suspended note “suspends” or replaces the third note in relation to the root note. So, in terms of standard or conventionally/traditionally constructed diatonic music, the “correct” name for a note a whole tone above a letter/note must be the next letter. For example, a sixth note is a whole tone above a fifth, so an A maj 6 chord has the correctly written letter sequence of A-C#-E-F#, not A-C#-E-Gb (although obviously it would “sound” the same). The interval between E to Gb is now a diminished third instead of a major 2nd (as E to F# would be). Another example would be the F maj b5 (flat 5th). One might think that F-A-B is perfectly acceptable, and besides, it looks neater because there are no accidentals! But it would “technically” be incorrect because the nature of the chord is a major with a flatted fifth. The fifth of the F root note is C, not B. So for this specific F maj b 5th chord, the proper letter pattern is F-A-Cb—although everyone would agree that the Cb and B “tones” (what you hear) are enharmonic or sound exactly the same. However, while the “tones” are the same, the “notes” (what you read as written symbols for the tones) are decidedly not the same and can never be “equivalent.” So the sequence used is separated by thirds since most chords are built upon third (tertial) intervals. Even a perfect 5th is built upon two intervals of thirds (min-maj or maj- min). If a diatonic composer intended to construct a major seventh chord, then that would be normally written as a maj-min-maj set of intervals, such as C-E-G-B for the C maj 7 chord. If he wanted a half-diminished 7th tonality, then the set would normally be written as a min-min-maj set of intervals (for example, Bb-Db-Fb-Ab for the Bb half- diminished 7th chord). Based on the diatonic structure, therefore, it makes better sense in notation to write in a third-interval letter sequence, although on a practical “hearing” level it wouldn’t matter if the performer played and the listener heard an enharmonic tone. Traditionally, therefore, to write “right,” so to speak, one normally constructs chords on the partitur in third-interval structures. Far be it from me to criticize “black sheep” diatonic composers who would rather be free to write music on paper in an unconventional manner now and then in regards to enharmonic notes! It is certainly not my intention to question Herrmann’s musicianship. I simply wish to share my observation that Herrmann spelled chords differently between two phases of his career. He tended to consistently notate enharmonic exchanges in his “early” works (say, before 1947) and to consistently avoid that practice (with few exceptions) in his middle (say, 1947 to 1965) and late (say, 1966 to 1975) career. These are not simply occasional “quirks” of writing, but almost a day-and-night consistent change of notation regarding enharmonic notes. Herrmann is not alive to elaborate on this phenomenon, unfortunately, so there can be a wide range of debatable theories or conjectures as to why he changed his notational habits in this matter. 2 My main thrust, however, is not to give “reasons” but to provide the data to show the differences of notation. I will offer some speculations, and readers/scholars can make their own conjectures (pro or con), but my main focus is to provide actual data showing the notational differences roughly “Before” and “After” 1947. In Herrmann’s scores written in the Fifties to his death in 1975, he consistently notated Fb chords, say, with the Fb note included, not exchanged for its enharmonic substitute (E). Roughly before 1947, however, he did engage in such enharmonic substitution just as consistently, whether for transposing or non-transposing instruments, single players or orchestral players. I will focus on the unusual Fb note since that note/tone would especially stand out in scores. My intent is to provide preliminary data to show this discrepancy between the tonal meaning (what you actually hear) and the notational meaning (what you see symbolized on paper as notes) between his early works and his later works (again, divided sometime in the late Forties). Obviously tonal music is not dependent upon the “notes” written on paper (E “sounds” the same as Fb). But for some reason Herrmann decided to notate them in third-interval letter sequencing later in his career. It can be that Herrmann in his earlier works simply did not “care” that much how the tone was notated as long as the desired tone is played. Then he either gradually (in the space of a few years) or suddenly (in far lesser time) seemed to “care” based on the apparent disappearance of enharmonic substitution. As given earlier, not being a twelve-tone composer, evidence suggests (however “soft” the evidence currently is because of the still relatively small sample of examples) that Herrmann decided for some reason to either abruptly stop or dramatically lessen this practice of exchanging notes for the same tone, and stick with third-interval standards (e.g., Fb-Ab-Cb-Eb for the Fb maj 7th instead of the enharmonic notation of E- Ab-Cb-Eb or even E-Ab-B-Eb!). There may indeed be specific or generalized “variables” involved (perhaps), but this would not explain why later, with the same instruments (transposing or non-transposing, orchestral or single-player), and with the same conditions, his notation was consistently different in the middle and late periods of his professional career as opposed to his earlier notation in regards to enharmonic substitution.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Finale Transposition Chart, by Makemusic User Forum Member Motet (6/5/2016) Trans
    Finale Transposition Chart, by MakeMusic user forum member Motet (6/5/2016) Trans. Sounding Written Inter- Key Usage (Some Common Western Instruments) val Alter C Up 2 octaves Down 2 octaves -14 0 Glockenspiel D¯ Up min. 9th Down min. 9th -8 5 D¯ Piccolo C* Up octave Down octave -7 0 Piccolo, Celesta, Xylophone, Handbells B¯ Up min. 7th Down min. 7th -6 2 B¯ Piccolo Trumpet, Soprillo Sax A Up maj. 6th Down maj. 6th -5 -3 A Piccolo Trumpet A¯ Up min. 6th Down min. 6th -5 4 A¯ Clarinet F Up perf. 4th Down perf. 4th -3 1 F Trumpet E Up maj. 3rd Down maj. 3rd -2 -4 E Trumpet E¯* Up min. 3rd Down min. 3rd -2 3 E¯ Clarinet, E¯ Flute, E¯ Trumpet, Soprano Cornet, Sopranino Sax D Up maj. 2nd Down maj. 2nd -1 -2 D Clarinet, D Trumpet D¯ Up min. 2nd Down min. 2nd -1 5 D¯ Flute C Unison Unison 0 0 Concert pitch, Horn in C alto B Down min. 2nd Up min. 2nd 1 -5 Horn in B (natural) alto, B Trumpet B¯* Down maj. 2nd Up maj. 2nd 1 2 B¯ Clarinet, B¯ Trumpet, Soprano Sax, Horn in B¯ alto, Flugelhorn A* Down min. 3rd Up min. 3rd 2 -3 A Clarinet, Horn in A, Oboe d’Amore A¯ Down maj. 3rd Up maj. 3rd 2 4 Horn in A¯ G* Down perf. 4th Up perf. 4th 3 -1 Horn in G, Alto Flute G¯ Down aug. 4th Up aug. 4th 3 6 Horn in G¯ F# Down dim.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Vs. Sounding Pitch
    Written Vs. Sounding Pitch Donald Byrd School of Music, Indiana University January 2004; revised January 2005 Thanks to Alan Belkin, Myron Bloom, Tim Crawford, Michael Good, Caitlin Hunter, Eric Isaacson, Dave Meredith, Susan Moses, Paul Nadler, and Janet Scott for information and for comments on this document. "*" indicates scores I haven't seen personally. It is generally believed that converting written pitch to sounding pitch in conventional music notation is always a straightforward process. This is not true. In fact, it's sometimes barely possible to convert written pitch to sounding pitch with real confidence, at least for anyone but an expert who has examined the music closely. There are many reasons for this; a list follows. Note that the first seven or eight items are specific to various instruments, while the others are more generic. Note also that most of these items affect only the octave, so errors are easily overlooked and, as a practical matter, not that serious, though octave errors can result in mistakes in identifying the outer voices. The exceptions are timpani notation and accidental carrying, which can produce semitone errors; natural harmonics notated at fingered pitch, which can produce errors of a few large intervals; baritone horn and euphonium clef dependencies, which can produce errors of a major 9th; and scordatura and C scores, which can lead to errors of almost any amount. Obviously these are quite serious, even disasterous. It is also generally considered that the difference between written and sounding pitch is simply a matter of transposition. Several of these cases make it obvious that that view is correct only if the "transposition" can vary from note to note, and if it can be one or more octaves, or a smaller interval plus one or more octaves.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuning Forks As Time Travel Machines: Pitch Standardisation and Historicism for ”Sonic Things”: Special Issue of Sound Studies Fanny Gribenski
    Tuning forks as time travel machines: Pitch standardisation and historicism For ”Sonic Things”: Special issue of Sound Studies Fanny Gribenski To cite this version: Fanny Gribenski. Tuning forks as time travel machines: Pitch standardisation and historicism For ”Sonic Things”: Special issue of Sound Studies. Sound Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, Taylor & Francis Online, 2020. hal-03005009 HAL Id: hal-03005009 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03005009 Submitted on 13 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Tuning forks as time travel machines: Pitch standardisation and historicism Fanny Gribenski CNRS / IRCAM, Paris For “Sonic Things”: Special issue of Sound Studies Biographical note: Fanny Gribenski is a Research Scholar at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and IRCAM, in Paris. She studied musicology and history at the École Normale Supérieure of Lyon, the Paris Conservatory, and the École des hautes études en sciences sociales. She obtained her PhD in 2015 with a dissertation on the history of concert life in nineteenth-century French churches, which served as the basis for her first book, L’Église comme lieu de concert. Pratiques musicales et usages de l’espace (1830– 1905) (Arles: Actes Sud / Palazzetto Bru Zane, 2019).
    [Show full text]
  • Pedagogical Practices Related to the Ability to Discern and Correct
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2014 Pedagogical Practices Related to the Ability to Discern and Correct Intonation Errors: An Evaluation of Current Practices, Expectations, and a Model for Instruction Ryan Vincent Scherber Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MUSIC PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES RELATED TO THE ABILITY TO DISCERN AND CORRECT INTONATION ERRORS: AN EVALUATION OF CURRENT PRACTICES, EXPECTATIONS, AND A MODEL FOR INSTRUCTION By RYAN VINCENT SCHERBER A Dissertation submitted to the College of Music in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2014 Ryan V. Scherber defended this dissertation on June 18, 2014. The members of the supervisory committee were: William Fredrickson Professor Directing Dissertation Alexander Jimenez University Representative John Geringer Committee Member Patrick Dunnigan Committee Member Clifford Madsen Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii For Mary Scherber, a selfless individual to whom I owe much. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The completion of this journey would not have been possible without the care and support of my family, mentors, colleagues, and friends. Your support and encouragement have proven invaluable throughout this process and I feel privileged to have earned your kindness and assistance. To Dr. William Fredrickson, I extend my deepest and most sincere gratitude. You have been a remarkable inspiration during my time at FSU and I will be eternally thankful for the opportunity to have worked closely with you.
    [Show full text]
  • Automatic Music Transcription Using Sequence to Sequence Learning
    Automatic music transcription using sequence to sequence learning Master’s thesis of B.Sc. Maximilian Awiszus At the faculty of Computer Science Institute for Anthropomatics and Robotics Reviewer: Prof. Dr. Alexander Waibel Second reviewer: Prof. Dr. Advisor: M.Sc. Thai-Son Nguyen Duration: 25. Mai 2019 – 25. November 2019 KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Laboratory of the Helmholtz Association www.kit.edu Interactive Systems Labs Institute for Anthropomatics and Robotics Karlsruhe Institute of Technology Title: Automatic music transcription using sequence to sequence learning Author: B.Sc. Maximilian Awiszus Maximilian Awiszus Kronenstraße 12 76133 Karlsruhe [email protected] ii Statement of Authorship I hereby declare that this thesis is my own original work which I created without illegitimate help by others, that I have not used any other sources or resources than the ones indicated and that due acknowledgement is given where reference is made to the work of others. Karlsruhe, 15. M¨arz 2017 ............................................ (B.Sc. Maximilian Awiszus) Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Acoustic music . .4 1.2 Musical note and sheet music . .5 1.3 Musical Instrument Digital Interface . .6 1.4 Instruments and inference . .7 1.5 Fourier analysis . .8 1.6 Sequence to sequence learning . 10 1.6.1 LSTM based S2S learning . 11 2 Related work 13 2.1 Music transcription . 13 2.1.1 Non-negative matrix factorization . 13 2.1.2 Neural networks . 14 2.2 Datasets . 18 2.2.1 MusicNet . 18 2.2.2 MAPS . 18 2.3 Natural Language Processing . 19 2.4 Music modelling .
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Probabilistic Topic Models
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Probabilistic Topic Models for Automatic Harmonic Analysis of Music A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science by Diane J. Hu Committee in charge: Professor Lawrence Saul, Chair Professor Serge Belongie Professor Shlomo Dubnov Professor Charles Elkan Professor Gert Lanckriet 2012 Copyright Diane J. Hu, 2012 All rights reserved. The dissertation of Diane J. Hu is approved, and it is ac- ceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: Chair University of California, San Diego 2012 iii DEDICATION To my mom and dad who inspired me to work hard.... and go to grad school. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page . iii Dedication . iv Table of Contents . v List of Figures . viii List of Tables . xii Acknowledgements . xiv Vita . xvi Abstract of the Dissertation . xvii Chapter 1 Introduction . 1 1.1 Music Information Retrieval . 1 1.1.1 Content-Based Music Analysis . 2 1.1.2 Music Descriptors . 3 1.2 Problem Overview . 5 1.2.1 Problem Definition . 5 1.2.2 Motivation . 5 1.2.3 Contributions . 7 1.3 Thesis Organization . 9 Chapter 2 Background & Previous Work . 10 2.1 Overview . 10 2.2 Musical Building Blocks . 10 2.2.1 Pitch and frequency . 11 2.2.2 Rhythm, tempo, and loudness . 17 2.2.3 Melody, harmony, and chords . 18 2.3 Tonality . 18 2.3.1 Theory of Tonality . 19 2.3.2 Tonality in music . 22 2.4 Tonality Induction . 25 2.4.1 Feature Extraction . 26 2.4.2 Tonal Models for Symbolic Input .
    [Show full text]
  • Trumpet Fingering Chart, Page 1
    ## G GFbbF E ED (F Concert) (E Concert) (Eb Concert) (D Concert) (Db/C# Concert) ∫œ w ‹œ b˙ #˙ ‹œ ˙ #˙ ∫œ ˙ bœ ‹œ b˙ #˙ ∫œ & & & & & Alt.: 1-3 Alt.: 1-2-3 Alt.: Alt.: 1-2 or 3 Alt.: 2-3 Possible: 1-2 or 3 Possible: 2-3, OPEN Possible: 1-3, 2 Possible: 1-2-3, 1 Possible: 1-2 or 3 b # b # D DC C B BA (C Concert) (B Concert) (Bb Concert) (A Concert) (Ab/G# Concert) w ∫œ ‹œ b˙ #˙ ‹œ w ∫œ #œ w bœ ‹œ b˙ #˙ ∫œ & & & & & Alt.: 1 Alt.: 1-2, 3 Alt.: 1 Alt.: 1-2 Alt.: 2-3 Possible: 1-3, 2-3 Possible: 1-2-3, 1-3 Possible: 2-3 Possible: 1-3 Possible: OPEN b# b# A AG G GF F (G Concert) (Gb/F# Concert) (F Concert) (E Concert) (Eb Concert) ∫œ ∫œ w ‹œ bw #w w ∫œ ‹œ b˙ #˙ ‹œ w #œ & & & & & USE 1st VALVE SLIDE USE 1st VALVE SLIDE Alt.: 3, 1-3 Alt.: 1-2-3 Alt.: 1-3 Alt.: 1-2-3 Alt.: Possible: 2 Possible: 1 Possible: 1-2 Possible: 2-3 Possible: 1-3 b # b # E ED D DC C (D Concert) (Db/C# Concert) (C Concert) (B Concert) (Bb Concert) w bœ ‹œ b˙ #˙ ∫œ w ∫œ b˙ & & & ‹œ & #˙ ‹œ & w ∫œ #œ Alt.: 1-2 or 3 Alt.: 2-3 Alt.: 1-3 Alt.: 1-2-3 Alt.: 2-3 Possible: 1-2-3 Possible: Possible: Possible: Possible: b B Trumpet Fingering Chart, Page 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Transposing Instruments
    3.5 Transposing Instruments 3.5.1 Introduction What is a transposing instrument? Every instrument has a range of notes it can play. These notes donʹt always fit nice and neat on the treble clef. If we didnʹt do something about it we might end up trying to read the music on a bunch of ledger lines above or below the staff. So, by using this system of notation we can get as many notes as possible on the staff where they are easy to read. Also, if you play an instrument like a sax that comes in different sizes, itʹs nice to learn to read just once and not have to read differently for each size saxophone you pick up. If you learn the fingering for one size of sax and then use that same fingering for a different sized instrument - guess what - the note is different because the instrument is a different physical size. 3.5.2 Guitar and Banjo Are Transposing Instruments Believe it or not, the guitar and the banjo are transposing instruments! When we play the guitar or the banjo, we are not actually playing the notes as written. You may say, ʺYou gottaʹ be kidding me. When I see an ʹAʹ on the staff I play an ʹAʹ, so how can you say Iʹm not playing the note as written?ʺ The simple answer is that we are playing an octave lower than what is written. For guitar and banjo we are pretty lucky. The note names are still the same, but we are playing an octave lower than what is written.
    [Show full text]
  • Amplitude, Frequency, and Timbre with the French Horn E-Mail: [email protected] and [email protected]
    IOP Physics Education Phys. Educ. 53 P A P ER Phys. Educ. 53 (2018) 045004 (7pp) iopscience.org/ped 2018 Amplitude, frequency, and timbre © 2018 IOP Publishing Ltd with the French horn PHEDA7 Nicholas Konz1 and Michael J Ruiz2 045004 1 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, United States of America N Konz and M J Ruiz 2 Department of Physics, University of North Carolina at Asheville, Asheville, NC 28804, United States of America Amplitude, frequency, and timbre with the French horn E-mail: [email protected] and [email protected] Printed in the UK Abstract The French horn is used to introduce the three basic properties of periodic PED waves: amplitude, frequency, and waveform. These features relate to the perceptual characteristics of loudness, pitch, and timbre encountered in everyday language. Visualizations are provided in the form of oscilloscope 10.1088/1361-6552/aabbc1 screenshots, spectrograms, and Fourier spectra to illustrate the physics. Introductory students will find the musical relevance interesting as they experience a real-world application of physics. Demonstrations playing 1361-6552 the French horn are provided in an accompanying video (Ruiz 2018 Video: Amplitude, frequency, and timbre with the French horn http://mjtruiz.com/ Published ped/horn/). 7 Background The French horn Students in introductory physics courses learn The French horn, often just called ‘the horn’, is a 4 about amplitude, frequency, and harmonics of member of the brass family of wind instruments. periodic waves on strings and pipes [1, 2]. On an It is made out of long, coiled up brass tubing that oscilloscope, the amplitude is the maximum ver- ‘flares out’ into a bell at the end.
    [Show full text]
  • Module 4/Melody,Harmony,Texture
    Module 4- Melody, Harmony and Texture Pitch in music refers to vibrations of sound waves. These vibrations are measured in hertz (cycles per second). Therefore a musical pitch is a sound produced at a certain number of cycles per second (Wade, 2013). The faster the vibration, the higher the resulting pitch. Likewise, the slower the rate of vibration, the lower the pitch. Musical tones can be divided into two cateGories: determinate and indeterminate pitch. Musical pitches contain a mixture of sound waves. The one that dominates the sound is referred to as the “fundamental” pitch. All of the other waves that are produced by a pitch are referred to (in the music world) as overtones. When a pitch has a set of overtones that allow a fundamental note to dominate the sound it is a determinate pitch. Indeterminate pitch happens when the overtones of a note are not in aliGnment or there are conflictinG fundamentals and therefore no “one” vibration dominates the sound. Another way to think about this concept is to know that instruments that have determinate pitch play notes that are typically Given names (letter, number or solfeGe). Determinate pitch instruments include (but are not limited to): voice, piano, Guitar, marimba, woodwinds, brass, chordophones, etc.… Indeterminate pitch instruments are instruments like Gamelan GonGs, snare drums, cymbals, trianGle, etc… These instruments are Generally used to keep a rhythm, to accent, or to add color. When a pitch has a set of overtones that vibrate alonG with the fundamental in simple ratios (see Figure 2) then it makes a harmonic pitch.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations in Music Psychology
    Foundations in Music Psy chol ogy Theory and Research edited by Peter Jason Rentfrow and Daniel J. Levitin The MIT Press Cambridge, Mas sa chu setts London, England © 2019 Mas sa chu setts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. This book was set in Stone Serif by Westchester Publishing Ser vices. Printed and bound in the United States of Amer i ca. Library of Congress Cataloging- in- Publication Data Names: Rentfrow, Peter J. | Levitin, Daniel J. Title: Foundations in music psy chol ogy : theory and research / edited by Peter Jason Rentfrow and Daniel J. Levitin. Description: Cambridge, MA : The MIT Press, 2019. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018018401 | ISBN 9780262039277 (hardcover : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Music— Psychological aspects. | Musical perception. | Musical ability. Classification: LCC ML3830 .F7 2019 | DDC 781.1/1— dc23 LC rec ord available at https:// lccn . loc . gov / 2018018401 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Contents I Music Perception 1 Pitch: Perception and Neural Coding 3 Andrew J. Oxenham 2 Rhythm 33 Henkjan Honing and Fleur L. Bouwer 3 Perception and Cognition of Musical Timbre 71 Stephen McAdams and Kai Siedenburg 4 Pitch Combinations and Grouping 121 Frank A. Russo 5 Musical Intervals, Scales, and Tunings: Auditory Repre sen ta tions and Neural Codes 149 Peter Cariani II Music Cognition 6 Musical Expectancy 221 Edward W. Large and Ji Chul Kim 7 Musicality across the Lifespan 265 Sandra E.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Requirement of Automatic Tuning Frequency Estimation
    On the Requirement of Automatic Tuning Frequency Estimation Alexander Lerch zplane.development Berlin, Germany [email protected] Abstract 2. Tuning Frequency The deviation of the tuning frequency from the standard tun- The concert pitch or standard (musical) pitch is used for tun- ing frequency 440 Hz is evaluated for a database of classical ing one or more musical instruments and is defined to be the music. It is discussed if and under what circumstances such pitch A4. Its frequency, the tuning frequency, is standard- a deviation may affect the robustness of pitch-based systems ized internationally to 440 Hz [1], but the exact frequency for musical content analysis. used by musicians can vary due to various reasons, e.g. the Keywords: concert pitch, tuning frequency, detuning. usage of historic instruments or timbre preferences, etc. Over time, the variation of the tuning frequency de- 1. Introduction creased. Briner [2] mentions some typical frequency ranges for the tuning frequency from the past three centuries, dis- Pitch extraction from musical audio signals is an important played in Table 1 as deviation from 440 Hz: task in the field of musical content analysis of monophonic as well as polyphonic input data. It is a required processing 440 Hz step for automatic transcription, melody finding, harmony Table 1. Typical Deviation of the tuning frequency from over three centuries. and key detection and other algorithms for audio content analysis. Year lower deviation upper deviation For these applications, various approaches to fundamen- Hz Hz tal frequencydetection have been proposed, but the mapping 1750 50 +30 ∼ − Hz Hz of frequencies to pitches is frequently regarded to be trivial, 1850 20 +20 ∼ 1950 − 5 Hz +10 Hz assuming the mid frequenciesof the pitches to be tuned with ∼ − reference to a standardized tuning frequency of 440 Hz for Nowadays, while for the majority of electronic music the pitch A4.
    [Show full text]